I wanted to vote to close a James Bond question as off topic because it's not science fiction or fantasy (it wasn't about Moonraker which maybe would fit but not Casino Royale). But I only got these choices:

This has happened a couple of other times too, and I end up giving up in frustration. Why aren't I presented with the complete list of choices?

Also, if I choose the "another site" bubble, the only other site presented is scifi meta. Literature would have been ok.

Bottom line, whatever algorithm is restricting the choice lists for these menus is working very poorly.

The other SE sites I frequent have a choice which, for this site, would read "off-topic because this question is not about science fiction or fantasy". But if that's not in the list, I suppose this is a feature request.
– Organic MarbleAug 31 '15 at 22:28

1

we actually don't get very many questions like that, so I guess we've never had a need to make a close reason specifically for that. they are all customized per-site.
– KutuluMikeAug 31 '15 at 22:31

3

@OrganicMarble No, in this case you simply have to select "other" and explain why it is off-topic. That's so that you have to actually think about a proper reason. Maybe you confuse it with flagging in contrast to voting, where you have catch-all "blatantly off-topic" reason but no "other" reason in contrast.
– TARSAug 31 '15 at 22:33

@TARS, when I tried to flag it, I got the same menu. But I take your point.
– Organic MarbleAug 31 '15 at 22:33

2

@OrganicMarble That's because you have close-voting privileges here. But on sites where you don't have (3k rep) you only can flag.
– TARSAug 31 '15 at 22:34

2 Answers
2

As far as I can tell, this is the complete list of off-topic close reasons for SF&F. What do you think is missing?

There are no migrations set up from SF&F to other sites, mostly because we don't need them. So, the list of "other sites" is empty on purpose. The volume of migrations is small enough that they can be handled by moderators, which is preferred (because they're usually rejected anyway).

If you want to close for a reason that's not in the list, pick "Other" and type it in.

Good points, thanks. As I commented above, the other SE sites I frequent have a choice which, for this site, would read "off-topic because this question is not about science fiction or fantasy". But if that's not in the list, I suppose this is a feature request. –
– Organic MarbleAug 31 '15 at 22:30

Migration to SE communities other than SF&F Meta is handled by Mods, not regular users.

You posted a picture of the menu, which offers four options. The obvious choice should have been "Other (add a comment explaining what is wrong)". This gives you the ability to describe exactly why you think the question belongs elsewhere on SE. I would have written something like: "Casino Royale is not a science fiction or fantasy movie, so this question is off topic for SF&F.SE". This would have addressed all of your concerns.

Literature.SE hasn't existed for quite some time, and I believe the new proposal for a reboot of the community is still in the commitment phase on Area 51.SE. As far as I am aware, it would be impossible to migrate the question there.

For reasons that I don't fully understand, we (and every other SE site) were limited to three or fewer customized off-topic closure options. For other reasons that I also don't understand, we elected to have an unusable and all but worthless "belongs on another site" option instead of the much more useful and practical "This isn't a question about science fiction or fantasy, dummy" option.

My opinion only, but the "this question belongs on another site" menu option is not very useful, if it only results in one other choice, ie. meta. Why not just have this say "this question belongs on meta" and not force the user to click through another level of menus before reaching the end state?
– Organic MarbleAug 31 '15 at 22:39

4

because we're using the SE software originally designed for larger sites which have more migration paths than we do.
– phantom42Aug 31 '15 at 22:46

1

@OrganicMarble - See this answer to a similar question. At the time the answer was written, there had been only 9 migrations in the previous 3 months. That works out to about one question every 10 days, which is not significant enough to justify changing the current system of allowing moderators to deal with migrations. It doesn't happen often enough to warrant a new system.
– Wad Cheber stands with MonicaAug 31 '15 at 23:13